News & Events

Is Your Health Plan Premium Affordable Under The ACA?

Submitted By Firm: Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC

Contact(s): Louis P. DiLorenzo, Thomas G. Eron


Date Published: 3/31/2014

Article Type:

Share This:

By now, most large employers are aware that they are required to offer "affordable" health care coverage to their full-time employees beginning in 2015 in order to avoid potential penalties under the shared responsibility (employer mandate) requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). However, large employers may be less knowledgeable regarding how to determine the affordability of their health plan premiums under the ACA. Recently issued final regulations provide for three separate "safe harbor" methods that may be used by large employers to determine affordability. A large employer subject to the employer mandate in 2015 (i.e., an employer that employed at least 100 full-time employees and/or full-time equivalent employees during 2014) that intends to minimize exposure to ACA penalties should review the safe harbors and determine which safe harbor, or combination of safe harbors, works best for its full-time workforce.

Affordability Safe Harbors Under the ACA

Under the ACA, coverage under an employer-sponsored plan is considered affordable if the employee’s required contribution for self-only coverage does not exceed 9.5% of the employee’s household income for the taxable year. Because an employer typically will not know an employee’s household income, the final regulations offer safe harbors that can be used by employers to determine affordability, based on information that is available to the employer. The safe harbors may only be used if the employer offers its full-time employees (and their dependents) the opportunity to enroll in self-only coverage that is considered minimum essential coverage and satisfies the ACA’s minimum value requirements. While an employer should assess whether its health plan satisfies the minimum essential coverage and minimum value requirements, it is likely that the health plans for most large employers will satisfy these requirements.

Use of any of the safe harbors is optional. An employer may choose to apply the safe harbors for any reasonable category of employees, provided it does so on a uniform and consistent basis for all employees in the category. Reasonable categories include specified job categories, nature of compensation (hourly or salary), geographic location, and similar bona fide criteria.

Form W-2 Wages Safe Harbor

An employer satisfies the Form W-2 wages safe harbor with respect to a full-time employee if the required contribution for the calendar year for the employer’s lowest cost self-only coverage that provides minimum value during the entire calendar year does not exceed 9.5% of the employee’s Form W-2 wages for the calendar year. To qualify under this safe harbor, the employee’s required contribution must remain a consistent amount or percentage of Form W-2 wages for the entire calendar year. An employer is not permitted to make discretionary adjustments to the required contribution for a pay period. The regulations provide guidance regarding how an employer may satisfy this safe harbor with respect to employees who are not offered coverage for an entire calendar year.

While the application of this safe harbor is relatively simple, it does present certain challenges for employers. The primary challenge is that, because employers generally will not know an employee’s Form W-2 wages until after the close of the plan year, employers will have to wait until the end of the plan year to determine whether the premium amount that is set prior to the beginning of a plan year is considered affordable for its employees. For example, an employer cannot always accurately predict how many hours an hourly employee will work during the year. A premium that may appear affordable for an hourly employee that is anticipated to make $20,000 during a year, based on a standard work schedule, may no longer be affordable if that employee misses work due to an extended leave of absence or other work interruption. Additionally, because an employee’s Form W-2 wages exclude elective deferrals to Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 401(k) and 403(b) plans, as well as contributions under a Code Section 125 plan, an employee’s Form W-2 wages will likely deviate from the employee’s base salary, which further complicates an employers’ task of determining an affordable premium.

One way of addressing these issues is for the employee contribution to be set at a level such that the contribution will not exceed 9.5% of the employee’s W-2 wages for any pay period. However, setting a premium based on a set percentage of wages could present its own set of problems with payroll administration.

An employer considering the Form W-2 wages safe harbor should analyze the potential impact of these issues before deciding whether the safe harbor is the best fit.

Rate of Pay Safe Harbor

Under the rate of pay safe harbor, coverage is considered affordable with respect to an hourly employee for a calendar month if the employee’s required contribution for the calendar month for the employer’s lowest cost self-only coverage that provides minimum value does not exceed 9.5% of an amount equal to 130 hours multiplied by the lower of the employee’s hourly rate of pay as of the first day of the coverage period (generally the plan year) or the employee’s lowest hourly rate of pay during the calendar month. For non-hourly employees, the rate of pay safe harbor is satisfied if the required contribution does not exceed 9.5% of the employee’s monthly salary. This safe harbor is not available for a non-hourly employee if the monthly salary of the employee is reduced.

The rate of pay safe harbor is not affected by the number of hours worked by an employee or by an employee’s deferral elections. Accordingly, the rate of pay safe harbor provides predictability for employers who would prefer to know prior to the commencement of a plan year whether the applicable premium contribution it sets will be affordable. The safe harbor may be especially useful for employers that have hourly workforces with fluctuating schedules because, under the safe harbor, an employer may assume that an hourly employee worked 130 hours in each month, even if the actual hours worked are much less (e.g., due to a leave of absence or general work slow down). For example, under the rate of pay safe harbor, if an hourly employee earns $10 per hour in a calendar month (and earned at least $10 per hour as of the first day of the coverage period), an employer can require the employee to contribute up to $123.50/month (9.5% of $10 x 130 = $123.50) for its health plan premium, even if the employee has one or more calendar months in which the employee has a significant amount of unpaid leave or otherwise reduced hours.

Federal Poverty Line Safe Harbor

The easiest safe harbor to apply – but likely the most expensive for employers – is the federal poverty line safe harbor. The federal poverty line safe harbor is satisfied by an employer for a calendar month if the employee’s required contribution for the calendar month for the lowest cost self-only coverage that provides minimum value does not exceed 9.5% of a monthly amount determined as the federal poverty line for a single individual for the applicable calendar year (determined by State of residence), divided by 12. This safe harbor provides employers with a predetermined maximum employee contribution that will in all cases result in the coverage being deemed affordable. Employers may use the poverty guidelines in effect within six months prior to the first day of the employer’s plan year. In 2014, the federal poverty line for a single individual is $11,670. Accordingly, using 2014 rates, the monthly premium under this safe harbor could not exceed $92.39 in 2015 ($11,670/12 x 9.5% = $92.39).


Failing to satisfy the affordability safe harbor with respect to a full-time employee could result in an annual penalty of $3,000 times the number of full-time employees who were not offered affordable coverage (an employer should be aware that, in addition to satisfying the affordability requirements, its coverage also must satisfy the ACA’s minimum value requirements to avoid this penalty). Accordingly, selecting an appropriate affordability safe harbor is an important component of developing an ACA compliance strategy. With the time for setting 2015 health plan premiums not too distant in the future, it is not too early for employers wishing to avoid ACA penalties to begin to consider how they will provide affordable coverage to full-time employees.

Find a Member

View or print a complete ELA member list »

Client Successes

Altra Industrial Motion Inc.

Altra Industrial Motion Inc. has multiple locations in the U.S., as well as Central America, Europe, and Asia. The Employment Law Alliance has proved to be a great asset in assisting us in dealing with employment issues and matters in such diverse venues as Mexico, Australia, and Spain. We have obtained excellent results using the ELA network for matters ranging from a multi-state review of employment policies to assisting with individual employment issues in a variety of foreign jurisdictions.

In one instance, we were faced with an employment dispute with a former associate in Mexico that had the potential for substantial economic exposure. The matter had been pending for over a year, and we were not confident in the employment advice we had been receiving. I obtained a referral to the ELA counsel in Mexico, who was able to obtain a favorable resolution of the dispute in only a few days. Based on our experiences with the ELA, we would not hesitate to use its many resources for future employment law needs.

American University in Bulgaria

In my career I have been a practicing attorney, counsel to the Governor of Maine, and CEO of a major public utility. I have worked with many lawyers in many settings. When the American University in Bulgaria needed help with employment litigation in federal court in Syracuse, New York, we turned to Pierce Atwood, the ELA member we knew and trusted in Maine, for a referral. We were extremely pleased with the responsiveness and high quality of service we received from Bond Schoeneck & King, the ELA's firm in upstate New York. I would not hesitate to recommend the ELA to any employer.

David T. Flanagan
Member of Board of Trustees 

Arcata Associates

I really enjoyed the Conducting an Effective Internal Investigation in the United States webinar.  We are in the midst of a rather delicate employee relations issue in California right now and the discussion helped me tremendously.  It also reinforced things that you tend to forget if you don't do these investigations frequently.  So, many, many thanks to the Employment Law Alliance for putting that webinar together.  It was extremely beneficial.

Lynn Clayton
Vice President, Human Resources

Barrett Business Services, Inc.

I recently participated in the ELA-sponsored webinar on the Employee Free Choice Act.  I was most impressed with that presentation.  It was extremely helpful and very worthwhile.  I have also been utilizing the ELA's online Global Employer Handbook.  This compliance tool is absolutely terrific. 

I am familiar with several other products that purport to provide up-to- date employment law information and I believe that this resource is superior to other similar compliance manuals.  I am delighted that the ELA provides this free to its members' clients.

Boyd Coffee Company

Employment Law Alliance (ELA) has provided Boyd Coffee Company with a highly valued connection to resources, important information and learning. With complex operations and employees working in approximately 20 states, we are continually striving to keep abreast of specific state laws, many of which vary from state to state. We have participated in the ELA web seminars and have found the content very useful. We appreciate the ease, cost effectiveness and quality of the content and presenters offered by these web seminars.  The Global Employer Handbook has provided our company with a very helpful overview of legal issues in the various states in which we operate, and the network of attorneys has helped us manage issues that have arisen in states other than where our Roastery and corporate headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon.

Capgemini Outsourcing Services GmbH

As an international operating outsourcing and consulting supplier Capgemini has used firms of the Employment Law Alliance in Central Europe. We were always highly satisfied with the quality of employment law advice and the responsiveness. I can really recommend the ELA lawyers.

Hirschfeld Kraemer

Stephen HirschfeldAs an employment lawyer based in San Francisco, I work closely with high tech clients with operations around the globe. Last year, one of my clients needed to implement a workforce reduction in a dozen countries simultaneously. And they gave me 48 hours to accomplish this. I don't know how I could have pulled this off without the resources of the ELA. I don't know of any single law firm that could have made this happen. My client received all of the help they needed in a timely fashion and on a cost effective basis.

Stephen J. Hirschfeld

Hollywood Entertainment Corporation

As the Vice President for Litigation & Associate General Counsel for my company, I need to ensure that we have a team of top-notch employment lawyers in place in every jurisdiction where we do business. And I want to be confident that those lawyers know our business so they don't have to reinvent the wheel when a new legal matter arises. With more than 3400 stores and 35,000 employees operating in all 50 U.S. states and across Canada, we rely on the ELA to partner with us to help accomplish our objectives. I have been delighted with the consistent high quality of the work performed by ELA lawyers. I encourage other in-house counsel to use their services, as well.

Ingram Micro

Ingram Micro is the world's largest technology distributor, providing sales, marketing, and logistics services for the IT industry around the globe. With over 13,000 employees working throughout the U.S. and in 35 international countries, we need employment lawyers who we can count on to ensure global legal compliance. Our experience with many multi-state and multi-national law firms is that their employment law services are not always a high priority for them, and many do not have experts in many of their offices. The ELA has assembled an excellent team of highly skilled employment lawyers, wherever and whenever I need them, and they have proven to be an invaluable resource to our company.

Konami Gaming

Our company, Konami Gaming, Inc., is growing rapidly in a very diverse and highly regulated industry. We are aggressively entering new markets outside the domestic U.S., including Canada and South America. I have had the recent opportunity to utilize the services provided by the ELA. The legal advice was both responsive and professional. Most of all, the entire process was seamless since our Nevada attorney coordinated the services and legal advice requested. I look forward to working with the ELA in the future, as it serves as a great resource to the legal community.

Jennifer Martinez
Vice President, Human Resources

Nikkiso Cryo, Inc.

Until recently, I was unaware of the ELA's existence. We have subsidiaries and affiliates throughout the United States, as well as in Asia, the Middle East and Europe. When a recent legal issue arose in Texas, our long-time Nevada counsel, who is a member of the ELA, suggested that this matter be handled by his ELA colleague in Dallas. We are very pleased with the quality and timeliness of services provided by that firm, and we are excited to now have the ELA as an important asset to help us address employment law issues worldwide.

Palm, Inc.

The ELA network has been immensely important to our company in helping us address an array of human resources challenges around the world. I strongly encourage H.R. executives who have employees located in many different jurisdictions to utilize the ELA's unparalleled expertise and geographic coverage.

Stacy Murphy
Former Senior Director of Human Resources

Rich Products

As the General Counsel for a company with 6,500 employees operating across the U.S. and in eight countries, it is critical that I have top quality lawyers on the ground where we do business. The ELA is an indispensable resource. It has taken the guesswork out of finding the best employment counsel wherever we have a problem.

Jill K. Bond
Senior Vice President/General Counsel, Shared Services and Benefits

Ricoh Americas Corporation

We have direct sales and service offices all over the U.S., but have not necessarily had the need in the past for assistance with legal work in every state where we have a business presence. From time to time, we suddenly find ourselves facing a legal issue in a state where we have no outside counsel relationship. It has been a real benefit to know that the ELA has assembled such an impressive team of experts throughout the U.S. and overseas.

A few years ago, we faced a very tough discrimination lawsuit in Mississippi. We had never had to retain a lawyer there before. I was absolutely delighted with the Mississippi ELA firm. We received an excellent result. They will no doubt handle all of our employment law matters in Mississippi in the future. I have also obtained the assistance of several other ELA firms around the U.S. and have received the same outstanding service. The ELA is a tremendous resource for our company.

Roberts-Gordon LLC

Our affiliated companies have used the Employment Law Alliance in connection with numerous acquisitions, and have always been extremely pleased with our ability to obtain the highest quality legal advice on due diligence issues from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We have found the Employment Law Alliance firms to be not only first rate with respect to their legal advice but also responsive and timely in assisting us with federal and state law issues critical to our due diligence efforts. We consider the Employment Law Alliance to be an important part of our team.

Rockwell Collins, Inc.

We have partnered with many ELA firms on the development and execution of case management strategies with very positive results. We have been very pleased with the legal advice and counsel provided by the law firms we have utilized who are affiliated with the Employment Law Alliance. The ELA firms we have worked with are customer focused, responsive, and thorough in their approach to handling labor and employment law matters.

Elizabeth Daly
Assistant General Counsel


Sanmina-SCI has facilities strategically located in key regions throughout the world. Our customers expect that we will provide them with the highest quality and most sophisticated services in the marketplace. We have that same expectation for the lawyers with whom we do business. With operations in 17 countries, we need to be certain that we have a team of lawyers working together to address our employment law needs worldwide. The ELA has delivered exactly what it promised-- seamless and consistent high quality services delivered in each locale around the globe. It has quickly become a key asset for our human resources department.


We own, manage, and franchise hotels throughout the U.S. and in more than 90 countries. With more than 145,000 employees worldwide, ensuring that we comply with the complex web of local labor and employment laws in every one of these jurisdictions is a daunting task. The Employment Law Alliance has served as an important resource for us and we have benefited greatly from its expertise and long reach. When a legal dispute or issue has arisen in some far-flung place, Employment Law Alliance lawyers have always provided responsive, practical, and cost-effective assistance.

Wilmington Trust Corporation

Wilmington Trust has used the ELA to locate firms in California, Washington State, Georgia, and Europe. Our experience with the ELA lawyers with whom we have worked has always been one of complete satisfaction and prompt, practical advice.

Michael A. DiGregorio
General Counsel